PJ residents Press Statement against PJ Sentral

PETALING JAYA RESIDENTS

REJECT CATASTROPHIC DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL

FOR PJ, SECTION 52

Petaling Jaya, 15 June 2010 - at a closed Hearing under Local Agenda 21 held at Ibu Pejabat, Majlis Bandaraya Petaling Jaya today, the Petaling Jaya Residents Associations, represented by Mr Liew Wei Beng, the President of All PJ resident Associations Coalition (“APAC”) have voiced their objections to the proposed development in the area of Section 52.

“This Development, if it is allowed to proceed, would have a catastrophic effect on the quality of life and safety of the Petaling Jaya community and residents” stated Mr. Liew.

“based upon our expert analysis it would contribute to road accidents, injuries and fatalities, it would increase demand for roadside parking by up to 6,000 vehicles, that’s equivalent to about 40km of roadside parking. The Development would also result in 6-lane highways and flyovers being forced onto currently peaceful residential neighbourhoods in the vicinity of Jalan Templer and Jalan Pencala, in order to accommodate the increased traffic.”

Also present at the hearing were several representatives from the individual Petaling Jaya Residents Associations Section 5, Maxwell and Fraser Towers, their collective legal advisers Mr Tommy Thomas, Dato' V. Sivaparanjothi, and Mr. M. Umar, and their technical adviser Mr. Ahmad Jefri Clyde.

The Petaling Jaya legal advisers, during the hearing, raised several fundamental legal issues with the proposal including the lack of a relevant infrastructure Masterplan, the lack of due process, the lack of detail and specification in the Proposal making it impossible to define what precisely is included or excluded in the Development. The Proposal as presented makes no provision for the cost of infrastructure upgrading and maintenance, such as sewage and waste, pathways, and public transport access, indicating that substantial related and consequential costs would be forced onto the local ratepayers.

Mr. Liew said, “We, as the residents and local ratepayers, are deeply concerned that much of the cost of accommodating such a Development, in terms of infrastructure upgrades and ongoing maintenance, would in fact be carried by us, and as we do not see a benefit to us from the Development we strenuously object. We are deeply suspicious of a Development Proposal, its developer and an approval process which would allow such abuse of the local community. We require a process which allows for greater engagement with the community such that the local stakeholders’ needs are fully understood, and so that the MBPJ administration would better understands how to fulfil their role IN OUR INTERESTS.”

The Petaling Jaya Residents’ technical adviser, Mr Ahmad Jefri Clyde, an authoritative Town Planner with 20 years experience on Malaysian town planning projects, pointed out during the hearing that the Development Proposal was deeply flawed or highly questionable on several grounds...

· It did not take into account the impact of subsequent phases of development in and around Section 52

· It did not demonstrate how this Development would integrate into the broader urban fabric such “new town” or the “state” area.

· Under present modal split conditions, it underestimates the demand for vehicular car parks.

· The plans show a 7-storey, basement car park that is equivalent to 30-acres car park to accommodate approximately 6,500 cars, but describes the basement as 4 ½ storey.

· The documents do not benchmark the proposal and its massive car park proposal against any other equivalent projects as a means of demonstrating its feasibility.

· It does not include any assessment of traffic flow within the 7-storeys of basement.

· It makes questionable assumptions on local road capacities and sizes, for example it assumes that Jalan Barat functions as a 6-lane highway, when in fact local residents would know that most of the time it is lucky to function as a 2-lane carriageway

· It proposes road works and local amendments that potentially are traffic and safety hazards, for example an assumption that to access the Development site, traffic would be able to successfully complete a U-Turn on Jalan Sultan, then ‘weave’ across 3 lanes of busy road. Local residents would well appreciate the safety hazard and perpetual disruption such traffic flow would cause.

· It includes roadwork expansion and development which would inevitably result in noise pollution and massive intrusion into local homes and residences.

· It does not detail how the financial provisions for upgrading relevant infrastructure costs and ongoing maintenance are to be made leaving the possibility they could effectively be passed to taxpayers.

Mr Clyde suggested that on technical grounds this Development Proposal falls short of the minimum requirements to assess acceptability for a project of this scale.

Mr Thomas and Dato’ V. Sivaparanjothi stated that the Development Proposal and the approval process were also legally unacceptable.

Mr. Liew on behalf of Petaling Jaya’s 600,000 residents reiterated that, “...based on safety and social considerations this Development Proposal fails totally to meet the needs and wishes of the local community stakeholders and ratepayers and as such is unacceptable.”

He went on to comment, “The Petaling Jaya residents categorically reject this Development Proposal because of the catastrophic impact it would have on safety and quality of life for the local community, and given these negatives, we do not see a single benefit coming back to the local community. The only beneficiaries would be the developers and wealthy vested interests, and as such it is unacceptable to us.”